KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 21 (Reuters) - For decades, demands by Malaysian lawyers for a cleaner judicial system have fallen on deaf ears. But now a grainy video by an amateur has suddenly answered their prayers.

A royal commission probing a scandal on judicial appointments that the video spawned has strayed beyond its narrow terms of reference and put the judiciary’s reputation in the dock.

The 14-minute video, showing a prominent lawyer boasting of his ability to influence judicial appointments and his connections with former premier Mahathir Mohamad, has also added a political dimension.

It may force Mahathir, who clashed with judges during his 22-year rule, to go on the defensive — a welcome respite for his successor, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, who is keen to avoid more scathing attacks from his outspoken predecessor ahead of elections widely expected by the end of March.

“It’s not about individuals really. It’s about the whole system,” said Ambiga Sreenevasan, president of Malaysia’s Bar Council, which groups about 12,000 lawyers. “It’s the whole system that is under trial. This is the chance to deal with it.”

The judiciary, under question since the 1980s over its independence and integrity has reached a critical juncture.

Once regarded as one of the more independent institutions in Malaysia, it has lost credibility since Mahathir clashed with top judges, three of them whom were removed in 1988.

Little faith

Foreign investors, too, have shown little faith in the Malaysian system. Lawyers said more and more foreign firms prefer to seek legal redress in Singapore, Hong Kong or London.

“I personally think it’s because of lack of confidence. There could be any number of reasons, but I would say confidence is certainly one of them,” Ambiga said.

Tunku Abdul Aziz,a former head of Transparency International in Malaysia, agreed.

“Nothing is more calculated to kill off international confidence in a country than for its judiciary ... to be perceived to be less than transparent and accountable,” he wrote in his newspaper column at the weekend.

The video shows Lawyer Kanagalingam Vellupillai, better known as VK Lingam (picture above), unaware he is being filmed speaking on his mobile phone — allegedly with the country’s then third-ranking judge, Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Hamid.

Mahathir told the commission last week he personally decided the appointment of top judges during his reign, discarding the advice of the chief justice on at least one occasion.

The opposition has blasted the 82-year-old Mahathir, who ruled with an iron grip before retiring in late 2003, as being ”evasive and uncharacteristically unforgetful” during the testimony.

Mahathir aside, another thorn on Abdullah’s side is de facto opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, who leaked the video in September and quickly turned it into a major election issue.

Mahathir sacked his former deputy in 1998, then had him arrested and jailed before he was freed in 2004. Under the law, he cannot stand for office until April due to his conviction.

Analysts said Abdullah, who swept into power promising a cleaner government and less corruption, should seize the opportunity to silent his critics and reform the judiciary.

“We can change it very easily. Now the chief justice is so straight,” the Bar’s Ambiga said. “I can tell you confidence will come back very fast. But they must want to change.”

Some analysts question whether the political will is there, despite Abdullah’s ability to ram through reforms, given his ruling coalition’s overwhelming majority in parliament.

“At the end of the day, nothing will change. Everybody, from Anwar to the Bar Council, just wanted to settle scores at the expense of the judiciary,” said one political analyst.

Jakarta, Jan 15 - Ten years ago, Amien Rais led thousands of demonstrators chanting "Hang Suharto!" to the halls of parliament, where they demanded the resignation of a man widely regarded as one of the most brutal and corrupt leaders of the 20th century.

Today, with the former dictator on his deathbed, Rais has a different message: forgive. But not everyone agrees, with protesters taking to the streets to demand the 86-year-old face justice.

Suharto is accused of overseeing a purge of more than half a million leftist opponents soon after seizing power in a 1965 coup, and killing or imprisoning hundreds of thousands more in the decades that followed - crimes for which no one has ever been tried.

He and his family also allegedly amassed billions of dollars in state funds, but defense attorneys have argued successfully for years that a series of strokes have left him unfit to stand trial.

"Maybe it is best if he dies, unforgiven by some, forgiven by others," said Goenawan Mohamad, 68, the founder and editor of Tempo magazine, which was forced to close twice during Suharto's regime because of its criticism of the government.

"But the debate should continue," he said at an outdoor cafe where former dissidents used to meet secretly. "It won't stop, it shouldn't."

Nearly 100 former political prisoners and relatives of those who died under Suharto rallied Tuesday in the city of Solo - not far from the mausoleum where the ex-dictator will be buried alongside his late wife. Some carried signs that said "Try Suharto before he dies!"

At the very least, they said, he should be tried in absentia.

"I was wrongly accused of being a communist," said 80-year-old Wiryo, who said he was rounded up during Suharto's 1965 takeover and thrown in jail, where he spent the next eight years.

Loh said he would be at the Jalan Duta Court complex tomorrow to testify before the Royal Commission of Inquiry, which was established to investigate the authenticity of the Lingam video clip and the truth of the allegations. The commission begins its sitting tomorrow.

When contacted, Lingam declined to comment on Loh's claims. However, he said that he would give evidence before the commission.

In an interview at his lawyer Americk Singh Sidhu's house last night, Loh said: "I was not aware then that my son was recording Lingam's telephone conversation. My son, who is now overseas, confirmed that he was responsible."

Saying his son was an avid photographer, Loh claimed that his son had earlier taken photographs of the lawyer's house and a discussion between Lingam and his sister, also a lawyer, on a legal matter when they were in the house.

However, he said, it was a mystery how the clip was made public. He said: " My son claimed that it was stored in a computer and wondered how it went to a third party."

He said he only knew of the existence of the video clip after it was talked about.

Loh said he and his son were prepared to testify before the Royal Commission of Inquiry.

"I will be at the Jalan Duta Court complex to testify before the panel. My son is also prepared to do the same."

Loh, who has business interests here and overseas, said he had no interest in the telephone conversation Lingam had with the unidentified person.

"The conversation started after he (Lingam) received a call. Whatever that was spoken and now widely publicised is true," he claimed.

Loh said it was also true that he posed several questions to Lingam after the conversation ended, which included who he was talking to.

"He told me it was the Chief Judge of Malaya," he added.

Loh claimed that since then, unknown individuals had been trailing him and his office had been broken into on several occasions.

Americk Singh said the evidence of his client and the client's son was important as it was covered by the terms and reference of the commission.

"We feel they can go straight to the commission and assist in the inquiry. They need not give any statement to the ACA first."

Last December, the government announced the setting up of the commission headed by former Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Haidar Mohamed Nor.

- to identify the speaker, the person he was speaking to in the video clip and the persons mentioned in the conversation;

- to ascertain the truth or otherwise of the content of the conversation in the video clip;

- to determine whether any act of misbehaviour had been committed by the person or persons identified or mentioned in the video clip; and,

- to recommend any appropriate course of action to be taken against the person or persons identified or mentioned in the video clip should such person or persons be found to have committed any misbehaviour.

Sixteen witnesses have been subpoenaed to testify before the commission.